Coroners Inquest - writing statement

paulgroom

I have been pairing down my statement to give the absolute facts and removed almost all of my 'feelings' (I felt this was wrong, I felt this wasnt right etc etc) I have removed almost everything that relates to me (I was very angry at this point, I was very depressed at that point etc etc) I have left only the most relevant points. It still stretches to 14 pages. I will have another look through it tomorrow and keep pairing it down.

But now I'm wondering whether I should pair it down. I have been reading the Ian Thomlinson inquest http://www.tomlinsoninquest.org.uk/tomlinson/

The transcripts do read like a court of law and the barristers are very aggressive and adversarial and come within a hairs breath of 'blaming' and 'apportioning blame' it doesnt take much reading to see what they are initimating (and sometimes directly accusing) witnesses of.

Now obviously, I'm not in exactly the same position as Mr Thomlinson or his family but I will be going into the same court (a Coroners court) so I presume I will have the same opportunity to question witnesses and will be able to ask difficult questions. All the questions asked at Mr Thomlinson's inquest were directly related to the statements given to the Coroner.

If I pair this down too much maybe I will be weakening my hand to ask questions at the inquest?

If I pair it down it leaves me more scope to ask follow up questions other witnesses may not have thought they would be asked?

I have already been told not only will I be allowed to speak at the inquest I will be allowed to ask questions.

I would hate to think she had to undergo a post mortem and inquest for nothing more than ticking a few boxes on a piece of paper.

DVardysShadow

paulgroom wrote: »

I have been pairing down my statement to give the absolute facts and removed almost all of my 'feelings' (I felt this was wrong, I felt this wasnt right etc etc) I have removed almost everything that relates to me (I was very angry at this point, I was very depressed at that point etc etc) I have left only the most relevant points. It still stretches to 14 pages. I will have another look through it tomorrow and keep pairing it down.

But now I'm wondering whether I should pair it down. I have been reading the Ian Thomlinson inquest http://www.tomlinsoninquest.org.uk/tomlinson/

The transcripts do read like a court of law and the barristers are very aggressive and adversarial and come within a hairs breath of 'blaming' and 'apportioning blame' it doesnt take much reading to see what they are initimating (and sometimes directly accusing) witnesses of.

Now obviously, I'm not in exactly the same position as Mr Thomlinson or his family but I will be going into the same court (a Coroners court) so I presume I will have the same opportunity to question witnesses and will be able to ask difficult questions. All the questions asked at Mr Thomlinson's inquest were directly related to the statements given to the Coroner.

If I pair this down too much maybe I will be weakening my hand to ask questions at the inquest?

If I pair it down it leaves me more scope to ask follow up questions other witnesses may not have thought they would be asked?

I have already been told not only will I be allowed to speak at the inquest I will be allowed to ask questions.

I would hate to think she had to undergo a post mortem and inquest for nothing more than ticking a few boxes on a piece of paper.

It seems to me that you have probably pared it down as far as you need to go in terms of being objective. There is probably no word count limit. So if it takes 14 pages, don't write a word less or a word more

If you were a legal professional, you might know how to game the system in terms of the statement and conduct of questioning to move towards a desired result. But I would suggest that you treat these matters as quite separate.

Write your statement to do justice to both your partner and to anyone else mentioned. As you are looking at Tomlinson, you will have picked up the format anyway. Then forget about it and think about the other parties and prepare your questioning.

floss2

paulgroom wrote: »

...
But now I'm wondering whether I should pair it down. I have been reading the Ian Thomlinson inquest http://www.tomlinsoninquest.org.uk/tomlinson/

The transcripts do read like a court of law and the barristers are very aggressive and adversarial and come within a hairs breath of 'blaming' and 'apportioning blame' it doesnt take much reading to see what they are initimating (and sometimes directly accusing) witnesses of.

Now obviously, I'm not in exactly the same position as Mr Thomlinson or his family but I will be going into the same court (a Coroners court) so I presume I will have the same opportunity to question witnesses and will be able to ask difficult questions. All the questions asked at Mr Thomlinson's inquest were directly related to the statements given to the Coroner.

If I pair this down too much maybe I will be weakening my hand to ask questions at the inquest?

If I pair it down it leaves me more scope to ask follow up questions other witnesses may not have thought they would be asked?

Forgive me, but at the end of the day, an inquest is held to investigate a sudden or "unexplained" death, not to apportion blame but to find out why a person died as they did. It happens that someone who died seemingly of a known illness may have to have an inquest because their cause of death may appear to be unrelated so a post mortem and inquest are held.

Please contact your Coroner's office, they will be able to help you and even show you the court room if you ask.